Issue 5744: spelling of the word Use Case (uml2-superstructure-ftf) Source: Object Management Group (Dr. Jon M. Siegel, siegel(at)omg.org) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: I have a question about the spelling of the word Use Case. The different >spellings used everywhere are a little bit irritating to me (but this may >not be the case for other people). I think that it should be one fixed >spelling of the word defined i UML. But even in the UML specification I >found three different spellings on the same side: Use Case, use case and >UseCase. In a book I'm reading they use the following spelling: Use Case >and, when used with other words, Use-Case (Realization for example). Resolution: see above, resolved Revised Text: Actions taken: October 25, 2002: received issue March 8, 2005: closed issue Discussion: The spelling used in the spec depends on the context and which specific thing is being addressed. Thus, the form “UseCase” is used when referring to the metaclass in the metamodel. The form “use case”, with no capitalization and separate words, is used to discuss the concept. The form “Use Case” is incorrect and should not be used in the document except where normal capitalization rules dictate it (e.g., in titles). Hence, the following changes need to be made to support the latter rule (the changes in text are indicated by underlining): ?? Pg. 136 last sentence should read: This may include e.g. UseCases and Dependencies (e.g. mappings), Packages, Components, and Artifacts. ?? Pg. 517: Extension points are indicated by a text string within in the use case oval symbol or use case rectangle according to the syntax below ?? Pg. 525 table entry: UseCase ?? Pg. 526 figure caption: Use case diagram with a rectangle representing the boundary of the subject. ?? Pg. 532: [1] The sources and targets of the information flow can only be of the following kind : Actor, Node, UseCase, Artifact, Class, Component, Port, Property, Interface, Package, and InstanceSpecification except when its classifier is a relationship (i.e. it represents a link). ?? Pg. 552: By virtue of Classifier being defined here, all subclasses of Classifier (such as Class, Collaboration, Component, Datatype, Interface, Signal and UseCase) can be parameterized, bound and used as template parameters. End of Annotations:===== X-Sender: siegel@192.67.184.65 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 12:59:20 -0400 To: issues@omg.org From: Jon Siegel Subject: Fwd: Usecase spelling Hi -- Forwarding this note from a user. Since we're writing specifications, this is a reasonable criticism. Can we please decide on an official spelling/capitalization for Use Case (or whatever). Once we do, OMG can at least ensure that Linda Heaton uses it in the specs, and try to enforce it in our domain (website, articles, slides, etc) and use it to answer this question when it comes up again as it surely will. Jon Siegel OMG >From: "Bo Svensson, IT, Posten" >To: "'webtech@omg.org'" >Subject: Usecase >Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 10:47:52 +0200 >X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) >X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by >emerald.omg.org id g9P8lim05744 > > >Hi. > >I have a question about the spelling of the word Use Case. The >different >spellings used everywhere are a little bit irritating to me (but this >may >not be the case for other people). I think that it should be one >fixed >spelling of the word defined i UML. But even in the UML specification >I >found three different spellings on the same side: Use Case, use case >and >UseCase. In a book I'm reading they use the following spelling: Use >Case >and, when used with other words, Use-Case (Realization for example). > >My english is not good enough to know which would be the right one >but in >Sweden, though, we don't usually write things in two words when they >mean >one specific thing. So I would prefer Usecase or usecase in one word, >otherwise you could missunderstand it with each words original >meaning, >especially when you read english/american books in a country with >another >language. > >Best regards >____________________________________________ > >Bo Svensson > >Posten Sverige AB >IT >441 86 Alingses > >Besvksadress: Jdrnvdgsgatan 19, 441 32 Alingses > >Tel: 0322 669537 >Fax: 0322 669597 > >Epost: bo.t.svensson@posten.se > >www.posten.se > >__________________________________________________ ================================================================== Dr. Jon Siegel email: siegel@omg.org Vice President, Technology Transfer http://www.omg.org Object Management Group First Needham Place Phone: 781-444-0404 250 First Avenue, Suite 100 Fax: 781-444-0320 Needham, MA 02494 USA ==================================================================